Trending on Denim Blog:

well for sfam and r&r, higher prices definitely do NOT equal higher quality. they rip wayyyyyyy too much for the prices they're being sold at..but i don't buy sfam anymore so yeah..not a problem anymore! haha

I think they rely on us thinking that higher prices equal higher quality, but I find most of the time, it's not the case. I despise when well known designers use polyester and other cheapy fabrics, but charge an arm and a leg. Then, there are brands that charge $70 for a regular long sleeved shirt, which has the same quality of any $5 one. IMO, you always pay the high prices for the name on the labels.

ETA: When talking about denim quality, I wonder- Tons people could have the same exact pair of jeans, yet only one of theirs rip. It may happen to different styles, but only a couple of the hundreds manufactured actually get defected. Does quality differ from pair to pair?

great discussion. i have been trying to ask around and get some information about this myself. i would love to put up a guide in the future specifically about quality denim. not denim based on price, but on the actual quality of the materials and workmanship.

gonna have to do a bunch of research first though. if anybody knows any professors at FIT please drop me a PM. i am trying to interview one of them this week.

IMO most of the time we're paying for the name. fakes exist because ppl want to look like they've spent a lot or live a rich lifestyle, which of course we know they end up looking like fools because its fake. i agree w/ the not-so-great qualities of sfam and r&r.. even though they fit well, both brands are notorious for thinning and pilling easily.

IMO most of the time we're paying for the name. fakes exist because ppl want to look like they've spent a lot or live a rich lifestyle, which of course we know they end up looking like fools because its fake. i agree w/ the not-so-great qualities of sfam and r&r.. even though they fit well, both brands are notorious for thinning and pilling easily.

my 2 cents.

i agree with this on some things. but i don't spend what i do on TR's for the name. i *really* don't like the way most jeans look on me so i'll pay the extra money for TR's that fit like a dream on me.

i will glady spend 100-300 just to have them fit and look the way they do on me.

So based on what you guys said...only True Religion and Diesel are worth paying for because they provide both quality and good looking denim. I'm not saying R&R or SFAM is bad or anything but most of you guys seem to be saying that the quality of Diesel and True Religion is good for its high price. Unfortunately however, I hate the back pockets of True Religions so I guess the only brand I can wear is Diesel.

no i find, all you pay for is the brand name but designer jeans definately have much nicer washes an cuts that fit you much better than a pair of like $20 jeans but they arent so much better qaulity at all. like has been said RR an other brands tend to rip alot and im sure a $20 pair of jeans wouldnt rip as much as RR do.
with tops though i find they keep their shape more and have better material than cheap tops.
diesel jeans however are really worth the money, the fit, washes, qaulity etc is all really really good.

lorna hit the nail on the head. The cost of the jeans is paying for the brand and the styling (cut, fit, wash, etc.) and that's about it in most cases.

If you think about it, there is no way for a pair of jeans to be of a level of "quality" purely in terms of durability and workmanship that makes them worth $300. If when you say quality you are referring to the fit and cut and wash/whiskering/etc. as well as the craftsmanship that goes into them and their ability to withstand wear and tear, then it's really a mixed bag.

Buying R&R, 7FAM, Diesel, TR (and all the rest) is paying for a brand name. Of course, with all the money they make selling those brand names, these companies are able to invest a lot more money into the cuts and washes they produce than a company like American Eagle or Bluenotes. Furthermore, 7FAM and R&R do have very well-documented durability issues. But I would argue that TR and Diesel are not of spectacular quality, they just shine in comparison to the easy ripping of R&R and 7FAM. I also like their cuts and styles a lot less, TR in particular -- the only people I know who buy and like TR are people I speak to online, none of my friends in "real life" like the brand at all. (Boring washes, ugly pockets, weird baggy fit...)

If you want to talk about actual quality of denim and workmanship, I think you have to look at PRPS and similar brands, who take the time to craft jeans out of selvage denim on Japanese looms out of African-grown denim.

Nudies are quite hardy, too, so they are worth the money in terms of longevity; but they are pretty trendy and unimpressive in the style department.

it depends a lot of the brand.I'm talking for men's fashion since I'm not a womens fashion critic.

Many are designer stuff whom you'll pay for their interest and efforts put into fashion,+ exclusive materials and insane cuts.
Many others are just 'buzz' brands a la Ed Hardy which are just made to die one month or another,but in order to make profit they'll make you pay $$$ for stupid prints.
And also many designers who are now bankable whatever they do (thinking dolce) don't really fear overpricing stuff even tho materials etc stay far over cheaper lines (thinking d&g).So sales recommended.
oh and I forgot the increasing number of very solid brands like Nudie,APC,Acne,Lindeberg etc who are very nice due to men's fashion going to minimalism

well to sum it up I think prices are justified if there is something really interesting behind the product,many many things are completely broken when you check details and quality (thinking true religion)

i would love to put up a guide in the future specifically about quality denim. not denim based on price, but on the actual quality of the materials and workmanship.

I really like that idea. Hell, having a guide for the quality of non-denim (clothing, handbags, shoes...) would be great as well, even in just the form of a thread where people post good and bad experiences they've had with brands.

I really like that idea. Hell, having a guide for the quality of non-denim (clothing, handbags, shoes...) would be great as well, even in just the form of a thread where people post good and bad experiences they've had with brands.

I like this idea too, especially the guide for the quality of non-denim. I sometimes see stuff that I like but when the price tag is a little high I sometimes ask my self whether its worth paying for because I'm not sure about the quality.

Has anyone ever considered that just maybe R/R and SFAM were never meant to be worn on a consecutive basis, or even as frequent as members here do. Maybe durability was never part of the equation for pieces earmarked for bimonthly wears, etc.

Maybe they're a *luxury* piece meant to be worn only on *special* occasions or once per month, or whatever, analogous to your higher end vehicles (koenigsegg, ferrari, mclaren, etc)--i.e. they're not daily drivers.

EDIT: Madonna (the material girl) use to never wear any single piece of article twice, ever.

Has anyone ever considered that just maybe R/R and SFAM were never meant to be worn on a consecutive basis, or even as frequent as members here do. Maybe durability was never part of the equation for pieces earmarked for bimonthly wears, etc.

Maybe they're a *luxury* piece meant to be worn only on *special* occasions or once per month, or whatever, analogous to your higher end vehicles (koenigsegg, ferrari, mclaren, etc)--i.e. they're not daily drivers.

No offense, but the idea of denim that isn't supposed to be worn sounds quite idiotic. And there are plenty of people who have had their R&R's rip or fail on first wear, including me.

Denim should in principle be durable and last quite some time. Those were the original intentions of denim.

No offense, but the idea of denim that isn't supposed to be worn sounds quite idiotic. And there are plenty of people who have had their R&R's rip or fail on first wear, including me.

Denim should in principle be durable and last quite some time. Those were the original intentions of denim.

It was just a thought. It might be idiotic, but what if in fact R/R are meant to be worn infrequently. Unless you're the designer or have contact with the designer, you don't know, do you?

Yes, denim was not meant to be a fashion statement either when it was first introduced, they were strictly functional and by default durable. Times have changed, it's now part of the fashion realm, so who is to say infrequent wears is an inconceivable concept.

EDIT: In a broader sense, clothing were never meant to be fashionable in the first place. Functional, not fashionable. Times have evolved, some clothing pieces are design to be worn infrequently, with durability not even a factor.

I've had 2 pair of SFAMs and 1 pair of PPDs rip on me. My COHs have developed a small hole, but if it gets bad, back to Nordstrom it goes.

I expect a lot from my stuff, but when a $150-200 pair of premium denim rips or has the build quality like a pair of Hollister or AE jeans - yuck, I get ticked off. I'll still buy it for the fit. I'm probably the small minority that won't fit into Diesels - even though they make my size, both Zathans and Zafs won't fit on my frame - and most Diesel stuff is made around European standards.